ISLAMABAD: The Senate Chairman, Mian Raza Rabbani, on Monday said that the process of legislation in the local bodies (LB) elections in the federal capital was under way. He said without legislation, the LB elections in Islamabad would be illegal and unconstitutional. Referring to the electoral process in Islamabad, Rabbani said that no body or organisation working under the Constitution could rely on a legislative proposal (draft law on the Islamabad Capital Territory Local Government). Rabbani noted that the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), in various notifications and circulars issued in relation to the LB polls in Islamabad, had coined a new phraseology that the ECP had placed in juxta position a proposal for legislation that was pending before parliament. “If such a precedent is allowed to develop, it shall not only have horrific, horrendous and chaotic consequences but shall also negate the entire process stipulated under Article 70 and the rules of procedure,” he noted. He gave his ruling after a lively but brief discussion held on the matter in the House, as the Senate met for a new session, following the launching of a report of the Senate Standing Committee on the Interior. It was tabled by Senator Dr Jehanzeb Jamaldeni. Senators on both sides of the aisle termed the poll process illegal and unconstitutional. Rabbani contended that the upshot of the discussion was that the Supreme Court’s order of March 10, 2015 and the two prior orders passed by the apex court were passed where the federal or the ECP did not comeup with clean hands on the legislative journey yet to be covered. He pointed out that the text of the bill on which reliance was being placed at the time for the passing of the orders was still pending before the National Assembly and was yet to be passed by the House and after such passage be transmitted to the Senate, to be considered and passed with or without amendment, before being sent to the president for assent. Some key amendments have been proposed in the bill by the House standing committee and the bill would be fixed on the orders of the day for further consideration and passage, he noted and said any member might propose an amendment on a date thereupon the House would be called upon to vote either to accept or reject the amendment. Subsequently, he said, the House might pass the bill as amended by the standing committee or as originally transmitted to it by the National Assembly or as amended on the floor of the House. And, in case the bill passed with amendments, it shall be transmitted to the National Assembly for consideration. “That the National Assembly may either accept the amendments made to the bill by the Senate or pass it or in case it does not pass the bill, under Clause 3 of Article 70 of the Constitution, it shall be referred to a joint sitting of parliament,” he noted. It was evident, he said, when the orders were passed by the apex court, the Federation or the ECP did not appraise the court that even after approval of the federal cabinet and passage from the standing committee, the text of the bill had not attained finality, as there were in the minimum four stages provided by the rules and the Constitution for its amendment. “The obiter of the Supreme Court with reference to its judgment of November 2013, that if the Constitution requires for a certain act to be done and calls upon parliament to legislate, yet parliament fails to legislate, the command of the Constitution cannot be held in abeyance or ignored. I have no cavil with this proposition, but the command of the Constitution cannot be carried out and or implemented in legal vacuum. In order to give pith to this proposition, as the bill was still a legislative proposal pending before one of the two Houses of Parliament, the order may have in such circumstances, despite my reservations that such an order interferes with and infringes upon the trichotomy of power provided in the Constitution, which has been vividly defined and upheld by the Supreme Court in various judgments, more recently in Civil Appeal No 782/2009, it should have laid down the broad guidelines or parameters under which the ECP could or should carry out and conduct the LB polls in Islamabad or in the alternative have directed the federal government to promulgate such a law, or issue regulation or notification to provide a legal cover to the process of holding of such elections,” Rabbani said. He said that to resort to any of the processed other than these would tantamount to obstructing, restricting, infringing and impinging upon the sovereignty of parliament to legislate without let or hindrance. “That parliament cannot allow any fetters to be placed on the process of legislation provided under Article 70 of the Constitution read with relevant rules,” he maintained.Earlier, in their short speeches, parliamentary leaders of all the parties, having representation in the Senate, expressed serious concern over the continuation of the poll process in the federal capital in the absence of a law and said, if not resisted, this would set a dangerous precedent.Some senators saw in the passing of the order an attempt to infringe upon the domain of parliament.
